Should it not be ALPA's Responsibility?

[AA717driver]

The fight to organize workers in the 1800's looked unwinnable. The fight to organize air mail pilots looked unwinnable.

That's what unions do--they draw a line in the sand and fight for WHAT'S RIGHT, not what's winnable. They won't win every fight. But, those who oppose us will soon learn that they will have to fight us--EVERY TIME.

Now, they know that we'll back down EVERY TIME because the fight is 'unwinnable'.

Keep sucking at the tit in Herndon, Rez, you might just hang on till retirement... TC

 

[luckytohaveajob]

In order to beat your opponent you must understand your opponent. In this case, your opponent is Prater and Age 60......

No one here has said why Prater is not backing age 60. Until you can explain why Prater is going against the membership then you have no arguement, cause why Prater and ALPA is against Age 60 might be better than being for it. (please spare me emotional tirades of "Cause Prater is a jerk" or whatever....)

Prater wrote this excerpt to explain in his words his motivation to change age 60," I(Prater) have a choice. To prevent ALPA from being represented on the ARC and having no say in how the rule is promulgated and allowing ATA, SWAPA,RAA and APAAD...........to develop all of the input to the FAA, or recognize our members are going to be affected...........

I (Prater) have chosen the latter and formed the BRP on pilot retirement to research and determine which issues should be addressed in the NPRM.......,and which issues will require CBA negotiations as part of any rule change.

..........the Union and companies are required to negotiate CBA modification following any law or rule change that affects the CBA in order to keep a contact in compliance with Federal laws."

So Rez, you asked the question what is Prater's motivation to allow age 65? Prater's answer is clearly to allow age 65 to "TAKE BACK THE PROFESSION." What better time to do that than with all the contracts amendable at the same time?

Prater personally wants age 65 and every ALPA contract amended as would be required by a Federal Law change.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Prater wrote this excerpt to explain in his words his motivation to change age 60," I(Prater) have a choice. To prevent ALPA from being represented on the ARC and having no say in how the rule is promulgated and allowing ATA, SWAPA,RAA and APAAD...........to develop all of the input to the FAA, or recognize our members are going to be affected...........

I (Prater) have chosen the latter and formed the BRP on pilot retirement to
research and determine which issues should be addressed in the NPRM......., and which issues will require CBA negotiations as part of any rule change.

..........the Union and companies are required to negotiate CBA modification following any law or rule change that affects the CBA in order to keep a contact in compliance with Federal laws."

So Rez, you asked the question what is Prater's motivation to allow age 65? Prater's answer is clearly to allow age 65 to "TAKE BACK THE PROFESSION." What better time to do that than with all the contracts amendable at the same time?

Prater personally wants age 65 and every ALPA contract amended as would be required by a Federal Law change.

OK... so what's the issue?

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Every ALPA contract becomes amendable at the same time with the age 60 rule change allowing Prater's greater agenda of taking back the profession to become a reality during his four year term.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

The fight to organize workers in the 1800's looked unwinnable. The fight to organize air mail pilots looked unwinnable.

Reference please....

That's what unions do--they draw a line in the sand and fight for WHAT'S RIGHT, not what's winnable. They won't win every fight. But, those who oppose us will soon learn that they will have to fight us--EVERY TIME.

fight for whats right for whom? If its a majority, then address the issue... the collective voice should be loud and clear..

Now, they know that we'll back down EVERY TIME because the fight is 'unwinnable'.

Have you been watching Prime Time Drama on NBC?

Keep sucking at the tit in Herndon, Rez, you might just hang on till retirement... TC

I am not necessiarily calling Herndon all righteous... What I am saying is for you pro Age 60 guys to get effective and quit crying on FI.... Get involved in your careers and quit thinking that down time is golf time.... If you aren't constantly mantaining your career then when the sheet hits the fan you won't be so surprised, emotional and ineffectual....

At the same time realize that life isn't fair....

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Every ALPA contract becomes amendable at the same time with the age 60 rule change allowing Prater's greater agenda of taking back the profession to become a reality during his four year term.

ok... and that is a bad thing to do at the expense of the guys who want Age 60 to remain?? (no sarcasm)

 

[luckytohaveajob]

No offense taken in the last post or any other post.

The motivation for change you asked about Prater.

who- Prater/ALPA
what- take back the profession
when- age 60 changes
where- at every MEC in the country
how- federal law change forcing the above

 

[Freight Dog]

OK... so what's the issue?

The issue is that the man disregarded the wishes of the majority for his own agenda.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

The issue is that the man disregarded the wishes of the majority for his own agenda.

And what is his agenda?

 

[FDJ2]

Prater wrote this excerpt to explain in his words his motivation to change age 60," I(Prater) have a choice. To prevent ALPA from being represented on the ARC and having no say in how the rule is promulgated and allowing ATA, SWAPA,RAA and APAAD...........to develop all of the input to the FAA, or recognize our members are going to be affected...........

I (Prater) have chosen the latter and formed the BRP on pilot retirement to research and determine which issues should be addressed in the NPRM.......,and which issues will require CBA negotiations as part of any rule change.

..........the Union and companies are required to negotiate CBA modification following any law or rule change that affects the CBA in order to keep a contact in compliance with Federal laws."

Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!!!!!! We have a winner.

ALPA recognizes the inevitable change, whether you like it or not, that the age 60 rule will eventually be replaced by a new age limit. It may not be what I want or you want, but it's going to happen.

You have two choices.

1. Sit on the sideline defending the current law, marginalizing yourself as intransigent and having no say in the implementation.

or

2. Focus your energies on having a voice in the implementation process and the new regulations.

 

[Freight Dog]

FDJ2... exactly like Foreign Ownership and Cabotage...

"Adapt or Die" as Rez says....

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

FDJ2... exactly like Foreign Ownership and Cabotage...

"Adapt or Die" as Rez says....

Like the martime industry... no more commercial US Ships, Officers or Sailors.....

Pointing out reality doesn't make a fellow Pilot an adversary....

 

[hoover]

So, basically you are just saying lay back and take the azz reaming. Good for you. Sounds more like you are in favor of the change, and that is your right.

Don't try to tell those opposed that their efforts are wasted because Prater knows better and has the ear of the Administrator and its coming and there is nothing we can do.......blah blah blah blah blah.

That is all just smoke and mirrors for a guy protecting his own interests instead of carrying out the will of the majority.

FJ

There's your problem right there. You talk about this like it is some sort of conflict. It's not a conflict, nor is it a conspiracy. It is simple evolution. The airline industry, like the entire world, is constantly changing and evolving. You can't fight it. All you can do is adapt to it. Unfortunately unions never seem tof figure that out.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

There's your problem right there. You talk about this like it is some sort of conflict. It's not a conflict, nor is it a conspiracy. It is simple evolution. The airline industry, like the entire world, is constantly changing and evolving. You can't fight it. All you can do is adapt to it. Unfortunately unions never seem tof figure that out.

Or thier members....

 

[Freight Dog]

Hey Rez... then why not dissolve ALPA altogether? From your arguments, it looks as if ALPA is outdated, not needed and should be dissolved.

We could all be like corporate pilots - negotiate our own salaries/work environments, no seniority worries... if your airline tanks, you command a seat and certain salary based on your experience, and not your date of hire...

I mean, why not? Based on your arguments... we might as well dissolve ALPA because the world is changing and unions are no longer necessary.

After all, you wouldn't be making that sh*t wage flying your shiny CRJ if you could negotiate your own deal, right? So basically, ALPA is just an obstacle...

I mean, one could derive this from your answers.

 

[FDJ2]

FDJ2... exactly like Foreign Ownership and Cabotage.....

Thanks for bringing up an opportunity to plug ALPA-PAC

While cabotage and foreign ownership is not a foregone conclusion, we do have to keep our guard up. That's why every professional pilot ought to be supporting ALPA-PAC or any other PAC that is opposed to cabotage and foreign ownership of our airlines. The last time an "open skies" agreement was touted by the Bush Administration Congressional pressure shot it down.

 

[Freight Dog]

Sorry... you won't see me supporting an organization with no backbone anymore.

With ALPA embracing "inevitable change" without a fight, who's to say that foreign ownership and cabotage "causes" won't be given up on as "inevitable change?"

Sorry pal... I have better things to do with my money. It's bad enough already that they're taking $150/month out of my paycheck...

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Hey Rez... then why not dissolve ALPA altogether? From your arguments, it looks as if ALPA is outdated, not needed and should be dissolved.

no, those are not my arguements... that is how you see it... Stick to the arguement if you can.... recallits Ago60 and why, pragmatically, Parater is rolling with the changes...

We could all be like corporate pilots - negotiate our own salaries/work environments, no seniority worries... if your airline tanks, you command a seat and certain salary based on your experience, and not your date of hire...

Nope... unfortunately there are too many whores that would under bid you and you would be singing as loud as you can for collective representation. You've found one thing to hate, the age60 issue, and now the whole organization is negated....

I mean, why not? Based on your arguments... we might as well dissolve ALPA because the world is changing and unions are no longer necessary.

Age 60...???

After all, you wouldn't be making that sh*t wage flying your shiny CRJ if you could negotiate your own deal, right? So basically, ALPA is just an obstacle...

I mean, one could derive this from your answers.

No, this is you rational....

Either become a solution or be a hinderence... nonethless...the industry is evolving.....with or without you...

 

[Freight Dog]

Rez... what I'm saying is insert any other controversial issue instead of Age 60, such as Foreign Ownership and/or Cabotage and see if you would find ALPA's "pragmatic" approach acceptable. Today it's Age 60. Tomorrow, it'll be Cabotage. Next month will be Foreign Ownership... when and where do you draw the line? How long are we going to give?

ALPA has clearly jumped a few steps ahead with regards to this issue. Instead of fighting an announced PROPOSAL, which hasn't even come out as an official PROPOSAL quite yet, we're talking implementation already! What's wrong with this picture?

Let me illustrate something to you:

You haven't taken paycuts at PCL, or lost your retirement or work rules.

On the other hand, many of us, myself included, have taken massive paycuts, lost our A-plans, lost our work rules, and now we get handed yet another concessions package, but this time it's coming from our national leadership against the wishes of the majority.

When I see a "pragmatic" approach, once again despite the majority, especially from someone who's vowing to "take it back", I don't see a leader, I see a wet noodle who should be recalled.

 

[luckytohaveajob]

Either become a solution or be a hinderence... nonethless...the industry is evolving.....with or without you...

The only aspect that has evolved is ALPA's disregard for its membership list.

ALPA is so political it does not even know what the truth is anymore.

 

[Tejas-Jet]

Sorry... you won't see me supporting an organization with no backbone anymore.

Check out the March 2007 issue of the "Airline Pilot" magazine? See the letter from AA ( and APA member) Capt. John Ehlers on Captain's authority. Seems he likes the ALPA view of things.

Didn't mention much about APA in his letter.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Rez... what I'm saying is insert any other controversial issue instead of Age 60, such as Foreign Ownership and/or Cabotage and see if you would find ALPA's "pragmatic" approach acceptable. Today it's Age 60. Tomorrow, it'll be Cabotage. Next month will be Foreign Ownership... when and where do you draw the line? How long are we going to give?

Can you hold back the ocean? The global market place is pretty powerful....

ALPA has clearly jumped a few steps ahead with regards to this issue. Instead of fighting an announced PROPOSAL, which hasn't even come out as an official PROPOSAL quite yet, we're talking implementation already! What's wrong with this picture?

They see the tsumani.

Let me illustrate something to you:

You haven't taken paycuts at PCL, or lost your retirement or work rules.

I never had a retirement to lose. Look if you want to play my pain is greater than yours then we can start a list is see who's is longer... the fact of the matter is every Air Line Pilot who was working on 9/11 has gotten screwed... even the new kids with Shiney Jet Syndrome are too niave to realize how bad they have go tit.. they should be making 40K first year..not 20K.

On the other hand, many of us, myself included, have taken massive paycuts, lost our A-plans, lost our work rules, and now we get handed yet another concessions package, but this time it's coming from our national leadership against the wishes of the majority.

Well... maybe the leadership has a vision... maybe they don't...

When I see a "pragmatic" approach, once again despite the majority, especially from someone who's vowing to "take it back", I don't see a leader, I see a wet noodle who should be recalled.

Then recall him.....but flush or get off the pot.... cause the complaining from your camp with no solutions is getting old....

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

The only aspect that has evolved is ALPA's disregard for its membership list.

ALPA is so political it does not even know what the truth is anymore.

And the vatican is so catholic it doesn't even know christianity anymore....